For the Volvo aficionado's....:))

Bret Chase wrote:
> On Wed, 07 Jan 2004 04:30:45 GMT, "Exit" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>>> DBurch7672 wrote:
>>>>> Part-time 4WD is pointless - if you're going to have 4WD have it
>>>>> all the time.
>>>>>
>>>>> What if one is NOT an Arab oil sheikh, a Texas oil baron, a
>>>>> British, (North Sea) oil whatever; and/or do NOT have the bank
>>>>> account of same?
>>>>
>>>> LOL!
>>>>
>>>> My Land Rover Discovery 2.5 diesel does 30mpg with permanent 4WD.
>>>> Are you sure it isn't the engine eating all that fuel, not a
>>>> couple of gears in the front axle? ;-)
>
>
> and what pray tell does a 2wd Diso get for mileage with the diesel?
>
> -Bret

LOL - there is no such thing.

--
Julian
---------
= Pretentious Sig required =

On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 01:11:07 GMT, "Exit" <[email protected]> wrote:

>:|Bret Chase wrote:
>:|> On Wed, 07 Jan 2004 18:42:48 GMT, "Exit" <[email protected]> wrote:
>:|>
>:|>>>> Douglas A. Shrader wrote:
>:|>>>>> "Exit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>:|>>>>> news:[email protected]...
>:|>>>>>> L0nD0t.$t0we11" <"L0nD0t.$t0we11 wrote:
>:|>>>>>>> Roughly 1/6/04 14:40, DBurch7672's monkeys randomly typed:
>:|>>>>>>>
>:|>>>>>>>> Part-time 4WD is pointless - if you're going to have 4WD have
>:|>>>>>>>> it all the time.
>:|>>>>>>>
>:|>>>>>>> That's one opinion. Not one held by anyone with a clue
>:|>>>>>>> about 4x4 drive systems, but an opinion nontheless.
>:|>>>>>>>>
>:|>>>>>> So, errr, what exactly is the advantage of part-time 4WD?
>:|>>>>>
>:|>>>>> I can turn much sharper in 2 wheel drive than I can when I engage
>:|>>>>> the four wheel drive, tthe last full time I had (a Jeep pickup)
>:|>>>>> would eat a set of front tires in 10,000 miles, you get better
>:|>>>>> fuel milage in 2 wheel drive, you have less wear and tear on the
>:|>>>>> vehicle in 2 wheel drive and 95% of the time I don't need four
>:|>>>>> wheel drive, but when I need it I NEED it, so what would be the
>:|>>>>> point of full time?
>:|>>>>
>:|>>>> If your 4WD setup reduces your turning ability and eats tyres like
>:|>>>> that it must be a very bad setup. My tyres (with fulltime 4WD)
>:|>>>> last 40,000 miles and handling is unaffected. As for fuel
>:|>>>> consumption, the savings are very marginal from what I have
>:|>>>> experienced, perhaps there are some figures that would demonstrate
>:|>>>> the savings? As for wear and tear, well it must be a delicate
>:|>>>> vehicle if driving your 4WD in 4WD wears it out prematurely.
>:|>>>>
>:|>>>> The point of full-time 4WD is that it is always there when you
>:|>>>> need it. You hit a greasy bit of tarmac, its already there,
>:|>>>> pulling out of a wet junction - already there. Patchy snow covered
>:|>>>> road with some clear tarmac, already there. Towing heavy loads on
>:|>>>> road etc, etc.
>:|>>>>
>:|>>>> I wonder if part-time is so good, why all manufacturers have or
>:|>>>> are dumping it?
>:|>
>:|> they're moving away from it because the general populace isn't smart
>:|> enough to use it properly. full time systems will never be anywhere
>:|> near as strong as a part time system.
>:|
>:|Why not - the permanent 4WD system on my 90 is stronger than the part-time
>:|system on my Series 2 land rover?
>:|
>:| as far as fuel mileage goes, go
>:|> drive an AWD minivan, my sister's AWD V6 Grand Voyager gets 13 MPG...
>:|> a neighbor's V6 Grand Caravan gets 25MPG. My truck gets 14 MPG with
>:|> 2200lbs in the bed.
>:|>
>:|> -Bret
>:|
>:|Pointless unless you compare the same vehicle, 1 with 2WD and 1 with 4WD.

they are the same vehicle with different badges... one is the front
wheel drive version and the other is the AWD version.

-Bret

"Exit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Douglas A. Shrader wrote:
> > "Exit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >> L0nD0t.$t0we11" <"L0nD0t.$t0we11 wrote:
> >>> Roughly 1/6/04 14:40, DBurch7672's monkeys randomly typed:
> >>>
> >>>> Part-time 4WD is pointless - if you're going to have 4WD have it
> >>>> all the time.
> >>>
> >>> That's one opinion. Not one held by anyone with a clue about
> >>> 4x4 drive systems, but an opinion nontheless.
> >>>>
> >> So, errr, what exactly is the advantage of part-time 4WD?
> >
> > I can turn much sharper in 2 wheel drive than I can when I engage the
> > four wheel drive, tthe last full time I had (a Jeep pickup) would eat
> > a set of front tires in 10,000 miles, you get better fuel milage in 2
> > wheel drive, you have less wear and tear on the vehicle in 2 wheel
> > drive and 95% of the time I don't need four wheel drive, but when I
> > need it I NEED it, so what would be the point of full time?
>
> If your 4WD setup reduces your turning ability and eats tyres like that it
> must be a very bad setup.

You simply cannot turn the front wheels as sharply when you have an axle
trying to turn also as you can with no turning axle. Even the part time 4x4
will bind when making a sharp turn in 4 wheel drive mode.

I'm sure not all full time 4x4's eat tires like that Jeep did, but they
still have accelerated tire wear, now way around it.

My tyres (with fulltime 4WD) last 40,000 miles and
> handling is unaffected. As for fuel consumption, the savings are very
> marginal from what I have experienced, perhaps there are some figures that
> would demonstrate the savings? As for wear and tear, well it must be a
> delicate vehicle if driving your 4WD in 4WD wears it out prematurely.

Drive a part time 4x4 and you wouldn't make such statements. Tires, sure,
you get 40,000 in fulltime, you might get 60,000 on the same tires with part
time, and your handling is affected, you are just compensating for it.
Milage varies greatly, large decrease when driving in four wheel drive mode,
even the owners manuals will tell you that, not to mention the hit you see
when you refuel.

>
> The point of full-time 4WD is that it is always there when you need it.
You
> hit a greasy bit of tarmac, its already there, pulling out of a wet
> junction - already there. Patchy snow covered road with some clear tarmac,
> already there. Towing heavy loads on road etc, etc.

THe point of learning to drive, you don't need it there. Hit a greasy bit of
tarmac, who cares, just go on across, you don't need four wheel drive for
that. Wet junction, same thing, even if it's solid ice you don't need four
wheel drive, you just need driving ability. None of the items you listed
require four wheel drive, sure in some cases it makes it a bit easier, but
not required by any means

>
> I wonder if part-time is so good, why all manufacturers have or are
dumping
> it?

Many good ideas are left behind because the general public is to dumb to
survive without help. Sure there are smart individuals but they don't buy
enough to control the market. Please don't take that as a personal insult,
it isn't intended as such. Don't know about your country but quality is
fading fast here because to many people base purchase decisions on price.
Why spend $20.00 on a wrench when I can buy this one for $2.00? Then when
the $2.00 bends they gripe about it "they don't build things like they used
to", then they go out and buy another $2.00 wrench. Part time is great for
people like me, I really don't care what you want to drive. You asked for
reasons, I gave you reasons. To and for me they are valid, to each his own.

"Exit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news[email protected]...
> Bret Chase wrote:
> > On Wed, 07 Jan 2004 04:30:45 GMT, "Exit" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >>>> DBurch7672 wrote:
> >>>>> Part-time 4WD is pointless - if you're going to have 4WD have it
> >>>>> all the time.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> What if one is NOT an Arab oil sheikh, a Texas oil baron, a
> >>>>> British, (North Sea) oil whatever; and/or do NOT have the bank
> >>>>> account of same?
> >>>>
> >>>> LOL!
> >>>>
> >>>> My Land Rover Discovery 2.5 diesel does 30mpg with permanent 4WD.
> >>>> Are you sure it isn't the engine eating all that fuel, not a
> >>>> couple of gears in the front axle? ;-)
> >
> >
> > and what pray tell does a 2wd Diso get for mileage with the diesel?
> >
> > -Bret
>
> LOL - there is no such thing.
>
> --
> Julian

ALL, and I do mean ALL discos coming out of the factory are 4wd.

rhys

Bret Chase wrote:
> On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 01:11:07 GMT, "Exit" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>>> Bret Chase wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 07 Jan 2004 18:42:48 GMT, "Exit" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Douglas A. Shrader wrote:
>>>>>>>>> "Exit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>>>>>>>> L0nD0t.$t0we11" <"L0nD0t.$t0we11 wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Roughly 1/6/04 14:40, DBurch7672's monkeys randomly typed:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Part-time 4WD is pointless - if you're going to have 4WD
>>>>>>>>>>>> have it all the time.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> That's one opinion. Not one held by anyone with a clue
>>>>>>>>>>> about 4x4 drive systems, but an opinion nontheless.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> So, errr, what exactly is the advantage of part-time 4WD?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I can turn much sharper in 2 wheel drive than I can when I
>>>>>>>>> engage the four wheel drive, tthe last full time I had (a
>>>>>>>>> Jeep pickup) would eat a set of front tires in 10,000 miles,
>>>>>>>>> you get better fuel milage in 2 wheel drive, you have less
>>>>>>>>> wear and tear on the vehicle in 2 wheel drive and 95% of the
>>>>>>>>> time I don't need four wheel drive, but when I need it I NEED
>>>>>>>>> it, so what would be the point of full time?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If your 4WD setup reduces your turning ability and eats tyres
>>>>>>>> like that it must be a very bad setup. My tyres (with fulltime
>>>>>>>> 4WD) last 40,000 miles and handling is unaffected. As for fuel
>>>>>>>> consumption, the savings are very marginal from what I have
>>>>>>>> experienced, perhaps there are some figures that would
>>>>>>>> demonstrate the savings? As for wear and tear, well it must be
>>>>>>>> a delicate vehicle if driving your 4WD in 4WD wears it out
>>>>>>>> prematurely.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The point of full-time 4WD is that it is always there when you
>>>>>>>> need it. You hit a greasy bit of tarmac, its already there,
>>>>>>>> pulling out of a wet junction - already there. Patchy snow
>>>>>>>> covered road with some clear tarmac, already there. Towing
>>>>>>>> heavy loads on road etc, etc.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I wonder if part-time is so good, why all manufacturers have or
>>>>>>>> are dumping it?
>>>>>
>>>>> they're moving away from it because the general populace isn't
>>>>> smart enough to use it properly. full time systems will never be
>>>>> anywhere near as strong as a part time system.
>>>>
>>>> Why not - the permanent 4WD system on my 90 is stronger than the
>>>> part-time system on my Series 2 land rover?
>>>>
>>>> as far as fuel mileage goes, go
>>>>> drive an AWD minivan, my sister's AWD V6 Grand Voyager gets 13
>>>>> MPG... a neighbor's V6 Grand Caravan gets 25MPG. My truck gets
>>>>> 14 MPG with 2200lbs in the bed.
>>>>>
>>>>> -Bret
>>>>
>>>> Pointless unless you compare the same vehicle, 1 with 2WD and 1
>>>> with 4WD.
>
> they are the same vehicle with different badges... one is the front
> wheel drive version and the other is the AWD version.
>
> -Bret

So turning a diff and a propshaft uses 10mpg?!?!?!? That must be some badly
designed transmission!

--
Julian
---------
= Pretentious Sig required =

Douglas A. Shrader wrote:
> "Exit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Douglas A. Shrader wrote:
>>> "Exit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>> L0nD0t.$t0we11" <"L0nD0t.$t0we11 wrote:
>>>>> Roughly 1/6/04 14:40, DBurch7672's monkeys randomly typed:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Part-time 4WD is pointless - if you're going to have 4WD have it
>>>>>> all the time.
>>>>>
>>>>> That's one opinion. Not one held by anyone with a clue about
>>>>> 4x4 drive systems, but an opinion nontheless.
>>>>>>
>>>> So, errr, what exactly is the advantage of part-time 4WD?
>>>
>>> I can turn much sharper in 2 wheel drive than I can when I engage
>>> the four wheel drive, tthe last full time I had (a Jeep pickup)
>>> would eat a set of front tires in 10,000 miles, you get better fuel
>>> milage in 2 wheel drive, you have less wear and tear on the vehicle
>>> in 2 wheel drive and 95% of the time I don't need four wheel drive,
>>> but when I need it I NEED it, so what would be the point of full
>>> time?
>>
>> If your 4WD setup reduces your turning ability and eats tyres like
>> that it must be a very bad setup.
>
> You simply cannot turn the front wheels as sharply when you have an
> axle trying to turn also as you can with no turning axle. Even the
> part time 4x4 will bind when making a sharp turn in 4 wheel drive
> mode.
>
What are you talking about? My axle doesn't turn - I doubt yours does
either! I expect part-time 4WD to bind when turning, but not a permanent 4WD
system with 3 diffs.

> I'm sure not all full time 4x4's eat tires like that Jeep did, but
> they still have accelerated tire wear, now way around it.
>
Why? 200hp divided by 4 wheels driven is 50hp each, half that of 2WD. As
long as you have a well designed 3 diff 4WD system wear will not increase
over 2WD.

> My tyres (with fulltime 4WD) last 40,000 miles and
>> handling is unaffected. As for fuel consumption, the savings are very
>> marginal from what I have experienced, perhaps there are some
>> figures that would demonstrate the savings? As for wear and tear,
>> well it must be a delicate vehicle if driving your 4WD in 4WD wears
>> it out prematurely.
>
> Drive a part time 4x4 and you wouldn't make such statements. Tires,
> sure, you get 40,000 in fulltime, you might get 60,000 on the same
> tires with part time, and your handling is affected, you are just
> compensating for it. Milage varies greatly, large decrease when
> driving in four wheel drive mode, even the owners manuals will tell
> you that, not to mention the hit you see when you refuel.
>
I own a part-time 4WD LR Series 2. The tyres don't last any longer than my
Discovery. I'm not compensating for the fact that my Disco handles better -
it handles better *because* it is 4WD. When I drive my SII in 2 or 4WD the
mileage varies by 1mpg at most.

>>
>> The point of full-time 4WD is that it is always there when you need
>> it. You hit a greasy bit of tarmac, its already there, pulling out
>> of a wet junction - already there. Patchy snow covered road with
>> some clear tarmac, already there. Towing heavy loads on road etc,
>> etc.
>
> THe point of learning to drive, you don't need it there. Hit a greasy
> bit of tarmac, who cares, just go on across, you don't need four
> wheel drive for that. Wet junction, same thing, even if it's solid
> ice you don't need four wheel drive, you just need driving ability.
> None of the items you listed require four wheel drive, sure in some
> cases it makes it a bit easier, but not required by any means
>
Yeah right. And if I eat enough carrots I don't need headlights either. . .
.. . . Makes me wonder why all these idiots buy 4WD.

>>
>> I wonder if part-time is so good, why all manufacturers have or are
>> dumping it?
>
> Many good ideas are left behind because the general public is to dumb
> to survive without help. Sure there are smart individuals but they
> don't buy enough to control the market. Please don't take that as a
> personal insult, it isn't intended as such. Don't know about your
> country but quality is fading fast here because to many people base
> purchase decisions on price. Why spend $20.00 on a wrench when I can
> buy this one for $2.00? Then when the $2.00 bends they gripe about it
> "they don't build things like they used to", then they go out and buy
> another $2.00 wrench. Part time is great for people like me, I really
> don't care what you want to drive. You asked for reasons, I gave you
> reasons. To and for me they are valid, to each his own.

As I said before I own bothe full and part-time 4WD vehicles, so I get a
good view of both. It is fair to say that your reasons are vaild to you and
I respect that, I do suspect that the real problem is the lack of
availability of decent permanent 4WD system in US vehicles. As you say, cars
are cheaper in the US and purchased more on price than here in my experience
which is why I thin low-tech is more acceptable as long as the price is also
low.

--
Julian
---------
= Pretentious Sig required =

rnf2 wrote:
> "Exit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news[email protected]...
>> Bret Chase wrote:
>>> On Wed, 07 Jan 2004 04:30:45 GMT, "Exit" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>>>> DBurch7672 wrote:
>>>>>>> Part-time 4WD is pointless - if you're going to have 4WD have it
>>>>>>> all the time.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What if one is NOT an Arab oil sheikh, a Texas oil baron, a
>>>>>>> British, (North Sea) oil whatever; and/or do NOT have the bank
>>>>>>> account of same?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> LOL!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My Land Rover Discovery 2.5 diesel does 30mpg with permanent 4WD.
>>>>>> Are you sure it isn't the engine eating all that fuel, not a
>>>>>> couple of gears in the front axle? ;-)
>>>
>>>
>>> and what pray tell does a 2wd Diso get for mileage with the diesel?
>>>
>>> -Bret
>>
>> LOL - there is no such thing.
>>
>> --
>> Julian
>
> ALL, and I do mean ALL discos coming out of the factory are 4wd.
>
> rhys

Except the one that was delivered to a dealer friend of mine a couple of
years ago with no front propshaft fitted! He wondered why it wouldn't move
after he released the diff-lock! ;-)

--
Julian
---------
= Pretentious Sig required =

"Exit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Douglas A. Shrader wrote:
> > "Exit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >> Douglas A. Shrader wrote:
> >>> "Exit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >>> news:[email protected]...
> >>>> L0nD0t.$t0we11" <"L0nD0t.$t0we11 wrote:
> >>>>> Roughly 1/6/04 14:40, DBurch7672's monkeys randomly typed:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Part-time 4WD is pointless - if you're going to have 4WD have it
> >>>>>> all the time.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> That's one opinion. Not one held by anyone with a clue about
> >>>>> 4x4 drive systems, but an opinion nontheless.
> >>>>>>
> >>>> So, errr, what exactly is the advantage of part-time 4WD?
> >>>
> >>> I can turn much sharper in 2 wheel drive than I can when I engage
> >>> the four wheel drive, tthe last full time I had (a Jeep pickup)
> >>> would eat a set of front tires in 10,000 miles, you get better fuel
> >>> milage in 2 wheel drive, you have less wear and tear on the vehicle
> >>> in 2 wheel drive and 95% of the time I don't need four wheel drive,
> >>> but when I need it I NEED it, so what would be the point of full
> >>> time?
> >>
> >> If your 4WD setup reduces your turning ability and eats tyres like
> >> that it must be a very bad setup.
> >
> > You simply cannot turn the front wheels as sharply when you have an
> > axle trying to turn also as you can with no turning axle. Even the
> > part time 4x4 will bind when making a sharp turn in 4 wheel drive
> > mode.
> >
> What are you talking about? My axle doesn't turn - I doubt yours does
> either!

How do you get power to your front wheels if the front axle doesn't turn?
That is BS, the front wheels are turned by the front axle, that has a
u-joint that binds if forced to turn at to sharp an angle, hence the binding
if you attempt a sharp turn. From your statement I have to assume you have
no clue how four wheel drives work, thus I have no more interest in
conversing with you on this subject.

I expect part-time 4WD to bind when turning, but not a permanent 4WD
> system with 3 diffs.
>
> > I'm sure not all full time 4x4's eat tires like that Jeep did, but
> > they still have accelerated tire wear, now way around it.
> >
> Why? 200hp divided by 4 wheels driven is 50hp each, half that of 2WD. As
> long as you have a well designed 3 diff 4WD system wear will not increase
> over 2WD.
>
> > My tyres (with fulltime 4WD) last 40,000 miles and
> >> handling is unaffected. As for fuel consumption, the savings are very
> >> marginal from what I have experienced, perhaps there are some
> >> figures that would demonstrate the savings? As for wear and tear,
> >> well it must be a delicate vehicle if driving your 4WD in 4WD wears
> >> it out prematurely.
> >
> > Drive a part time 4x4 and you wouldn't make such statements. Tires,
> > sure, you get 40,000 in fulltime, you might get 60,000 on the same
> > tires with part time, and your handling is affected, you are just
> > compensating for it. Milage varies greatly, large decrease when
> > driving in four wheel drive mode, even the owners manuals will tell
> > you that, not to mention the hit you see when you refuel.
> >
> I own a part-time 4WD LR Series 2. The tyres don't last any longer than my
> Discovery. I'm not compensating for the fact that my Disco handles
better -
> it handles better *because* it is 4WD. When I drive my SII in 2 or 4WD the
> mileage varies by 1mpg at most.
>
> >>
> >> The point of full-time 4WD is that it is always there when you need
> >> it. You hit a greasy bit of tarmac, its already there, pulling out
> >> of a wet junction - already there. Patchy snow covered road with
> >> some clear tarmac, already there. Towing heavy loads on road etc,
> >> etc.
> >
> > THe point of learning to drive, you don't need it there. Hit a greasy
> > bit of tarmac, who cares, just go on across, you don't need four
> > wheel drive for that. Wet junction, same thing, even if it's solid
> > ice you don't need four wheel drive, you just need driving ability.
> > None of the items you listed require four wheel drive, sure in some
> > cases it makes it a bit easier, but not required by any means
> >
> Yeah right. And if I eat enough carrots I don't need headlights either. .
..
> . . . Makes me wonder why all these idiots buy 4WD.
>
> >>
> >> I wonder if part-time is so good, why all manufacturers have or are
> >> dumping it?
> >
> > Many good ideas are left behind because the general public is to dumb
> > to survive without help. Sure there are smart individuals but they
> > don't buy enough to control the market. Please don't take that as a
> > personal insult, it isn't intended as such. Don't know about your
> > country but quality is fading fast here because to many people base
> > purchase decisions on price. Why spend $20.00 on a wrench when I can
> > buy this one for $2.00? Then when the $2.00 bends they gripe about it
> > "they don't build things like they used to", then they go out and buy
> > another $2.00 wrench. Part time is great for people like me, I really
> > don't care what you want to drive. You asked for reasons, I gave you
> > reasons. To and for me they are valid, to each his own.
>
> As I said before I own bothe full and part-time 4WD vehicles, so I get a
> good view of both. It is fair to say that your reasons are vaild to you
and
> I respect that, I do suspect that the real problem is the lack of
> availability of decent permanent 4WD system in US vehicles. As you say,
cars
> are cheaper in the US and purchased more on price than here in my
experience
> which is why I thin low-tech is more acceptable as long as the price is
also
> low.
>
> --
> Julian
> ---------
> = Pretentious Sig required =
>
>

"Exit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Douglas A. Shrader wrote:

> >> If your 4WD setup reduces your turning ability and eats tyres like
> >> that it must be a very bad setup.
> >
> > You simply cannot turn the front wheels as sharply when you have an
> > axle trying to turn also as you can with no turning axle. Even the
> > part time 4x4 will bind when making a sharp turn in 4 wheel drive
> > mode.
> >
> What are you talking about? My axle doesn't turn - I doubt yours does
> either! I expect part-time 4WD to bind when turning, but not a permanent
4WD
> system with 3 diffs.

I think I see the problem here. I am not talking about a permanent 4 wheel
drive with 3 diffs, I'm talking about full time four wheel drive, which only
has two diffs. The two diff setup with no option to use two wheel drive has
always been call Full time four wheel drive, long before I ever heard of the
diffs being used, and that is the diffintion I think of when someone says
fulltime.

>
> > I'm sure not all full time 4x4's eat tires like that Jeep did, but
> > they still have accelerated tire wear, now way around it.
> >
> Why? 200hp divided by 4 wheels driven is 50hp each, half that of 2WD. As
> long as you have a well designed 3 diff 4WD system wear will not increase
> over 2WD.

See above.

>
> > My tyres (with fulltime 4WD) last 40,000 miles and
> >> handling is unaffected. As for fuel consumption, the savings are very
> >> marginal from what I have experienced, perhaps there are some
> >> figures that would demonstrate the savings? As for wear and tear,
> >> well it must be a delicate vehicle if driving your 4WD in 4WD wears
> >> it out prematurely.
> >
> > Drive a part time 4x4 and you wouldn't make such statements. Tires,
> > sure, you get 40,000 in fulltime, you might get 60,000 on the same
> > tires with part time, and your handling is affected, you are just
> > compensating for it. Milage varies greatly, large decrease when
> > driving in four wheel drive mode, even the owners manuals will tell
> > you that, not to mention the hit you see when you refuel.
> >
> I own a part-time 4WD LR Series 2. The tyres don't last any longer than my
> Discovery. I'm not compensating for the fact that my Disco handles
better -
> it handles better *because* it is 4WD. When I drive my SII in 2 or 4WD the
> mileage varies by 1mpg at most.


See above.

>
> >>
> >> The point of full-time 4WD is that it is always there when you need
> >> it. You hit a greasy bit of tarmac, its already there, pulling out
> >> of a wet junction - already there. Patchy snow covered road with
> >> some clear tarmac, already there. Towing heavy loads on road etc,
> >> etc.
> >
> > THe point of learning to drive, you don't need it there. Hit a greasy
> > bit of tarmac, who cares, just go on across, you don't need four
> > wheel drive for that. Wet junction, same thing, even if it's solid
> > ice you don't need four wheel drive, you just need driving ability.
> > None of the items you listed require four wheel drive, sure in some
> > cases it makes it a bit easier, but not required by any means
> >
> Yeah right. And if I eat enough carrots I don't need headlights either. .
..
> . . . Makes me wonder why all these idiots buy 4WD.

Now your being silly, I expected better from you. The road was snow and ice
covered this morning here, I had no trouble making it to work in 2 wheel
drive. 4 wheel drive is used when there are four foot drifts across the
road, not patches of snow here and there.

>
> >>
> >> I wonder if part-time is so good, why all manufacturers have or are
> >> dumping it?
> >
> > Many good ideas are left behind because the general public is to dumb
> > to survive without help. Sure there are smart individuals but they
> > don't buy enough to control the market. Please don't take that as a
> > personal insult, it isn't intended as such. Don't know about your
> > country but quality is fading fast here because to many people base
> > purchase decisions on price. Why spend $20.00 on a wrench when I can
> > buy this one for $2.00? Then when the $2.00 bends they gripe about it
> > "they don't build things like they used to", then they go out and buy
> > another $2.00 wrench. Part time is great for people like me, I really
> > don't care what you want to drive. You asked for reasons, I gave you
> > reasons. To and for me they are valid, to each his own.
>
> As I said before I own bothe full and part-time 4WD vehicles, so I get a
> good view of both.

See above, what you and I were calling fulltime are not the same vehicles.
Tell me, does your part time have two or three diffs?

It is fair to say that your reasons are vaild to you and
> I respect that, I do suspect that the real problem is the lack of
> availability of decent permanent 4WD system in US vehicles. As you say,
cars
> are cheaper in the US and purchased more on price than here in my
experience
> which is why I thin low-tech is more acceptable as long as the price is
also
> low.

You thin? ;-)

>
> I think I see the problem here. I am not talking about a permanent 4 wheel
> drive with 3 diffs, I'm talking about full time four wheel drive, which only
> has two diffs. The two diff setup with no option to use two wheel drive has
> always been call Full time four wheel drive, long before I ever heard of the
> diffs being used, and that is the diffintion I think of when someone says
> fulltime.

That's called a farm tractor unless by no middle diff you mean it has a
viscous coupling or something similar.

--
____________________
Remove "X" from email address to reply.

"Chris Phillipo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> >
> > I think I see the problem here. I am not talking about a permanent 4
wheel
> > drive with 3 diffs, I'm talking about full time four wheel drive, which
only
> > has two diffs. The two diff setup with no option to use two wheel drive
has
> > always been call Full time four wheel drive, long before I ever heard of
the
> > diffs being used, and that is the diffintion I think of when someone
says
> > fulltime.
>
> That's called a farm tractor unless by no middle diff you mean it has a
> viscous coupling or something similar.
>

No genius, as a farmer who owns a tractor I'm well aware of what a tractor
is, though obviously you aren't. Listen carefully.

The fulltime has an Engine, Transmission, and Transfer case. One Driveshaft
goes from the front of the Transfer case to the Front Differential, a second
Driveshaft goes from the rear of the Transfer case to the Rear Differential.
There is no Third Differential, Trucks that have a Third Differential are
called Fulltime 4x4's by many, but as the name was first applied to the
vehicles I described it becomes confusing, so I for clarity here borrowed
Julians term Permanent Four wheel drive.

I do hope all the big words aren't confusing you still.

And please don't make some lame comment about "Well that's only in America",
because my 84 came from Canada built exactly as I described above, and it
has worked wonderfully for 300,000 miles. My 91 is different only in the
lack of locking hubs, using instead a locking front differential, and it
works great after 215,000 miles. My Jeep CJ-7 also has lockouts and no third
differential, as anyone with any knowledge at all about 4x4's and offroading
well knows.

I used to think people who called you an idiot were wrong, now I know
better.

Douglas A. Shrader <[email protected]> wrote:

> "Chris Phillipo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> >
>> > I think I see the problem here. I am not talking about a permanent 4
> wheel
>> > drive with 3 diffs, I'm talking about full time four wheel drive, which
> only
>> > has two diffs. The two diff setup with no option to use two wheel drive
> has
>> > always been call Full time four wheel drive, long before I ever heard of
> the
>> > diffs being used, and that is the diffintion I think of when someone
> says
>> > fulltime.
>>
>> That's called a farm tractor unless by no middle diff you mean it has a
>> viscous coupling or something similar.
>>

> No genius, as a farmer who owns a tractor I'm well aware of what a tractor
> is, though obviously you aren't. Listen carefully.

> The fulltime has an Engine, Transmission, and Transfer case. One Driveshaft
> goes from the front of the Transfer case to the Front Differential, a second
> Driveshaft goes from the rear of the Transfer case to the Rear Differential.
> There is no Third Differential, Trucks that have a Third Differential are
> called Fulltime 4x4's by many, but as the name was first applied to the
> vehicles I described it becomes confusing, so I for clarity here borrowed
> Julians term Permanent Four wheel drive.

I think I share Chris's lack of understanding here then. How do you
drive one of these "Permanent Four Wheel Drive" vehicles over a change
of gradient, or around a corner, on a grippy surface, without scrubing
tyres or breaking axles?

I'll set out some ASCII art so you can draw me a diagram:

Douglas's "Permanent Four Wheel Drive":

motor---gearbox---transfer case---rear diff
|
front diff

That is, front and rear diffs driven by transfer case (no third
differential or viscous coupling).

Now here is the car going from a flat road to up a hill:

__ /
/--\ /__-O/
O----O____O___/

Now, when this "Permanent Four Wheel Drive" vehicle starts going up the
slope, does it:
stretch or compress; slip at the tyres; bind in the axle; seperate at
the transfer case; or break?

--
*--------------------------------------------------------*
| ^Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool^ |
| Heath Raftery, HRSoftWorks _\|/_ |
*______________________________________m_('.')_m_________*

"Heath Raftery" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Douglas A. Shrader <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > "Chris Phillipo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >>
> >> >
> >> > I think I see the problem here. I am not talking about a permanent 4
> > wheel
> >> > drive with 3 diffs, I'm talking about full time four wheel drive,
which
> > only
> >> > has two diffs. The two diff setup with no option to use two wheel
drive
> > has
> >> > always been call Full time four wheel drive, long before I ever heard
of
> > the
> >> > diffs being used, and that is the diffintion I think of when someone
> > says
> >> > fulltime.
> >>
> >> That's called a farm tractor unless by no middle diff you mean it has a
> >> viscous coupling or something similar.
> >>
>
> > No genius, as a farmer who owns a tractor I'm well aware of what a
tractor
> > is, though obviously you aren't. Listen carefully.
>
> > The fulltime has an Engine, Transmission, and Transfer case. One
Driveshaft
> > goes from the front of the Transfer case to the Front Differential, a
second
> > Driveshaft goes from the rear of the Transfer case to the Rear
Differential.
> > There is no Third Differential, Trucks that have a Third Differential
are
> > called Fulltime 4x4's by many, but as the name was first applied to the
> > vehicles I described it becomes confusing, so I for clarity here
borrowed
> > Julians term Permanent Four wheel drive.
>
> I think I share Chris's lack of understanding here then. How do you
> drive one of these "Permanent Four Wheel Drive" vehicles over a change
> of gradient, or around a corner, on a grippy surface, without scrubing
> tyres or breaking axles?
>
> I'll set out some ASCII art so you can draw me a diagram:
>
> Douglas's "Permanent Four Wheel Drive":

No, that is Fulltime four wheel drive, the type that has been manufactured
for the last fifty years. Yes, the tires have to slip, that is why you get
the increased tire wear, binding on sharp turns, increased wear on the
driveline and lower gas milage, and it is why I said part time was better
than fulltime. The Permanent Four wheel drive has the Third Differential and
is NOT the type I was refering to when I said part time was better. Jesus
people, learn to read, Please.

>
> motor---gearbox---transfer case---rear diff
> |
> front diff
>
> That is, front and rear diffs driven by transfer case (no third
> differential or viscous coupling).
>
> Now here is the car going from a flat road to up a hill:
>
> __ /
> /--\ /__-O/
> O----O____O___/
>
> Now, when this "Permanent Four Wheel Drive" vehicle starts going up the
> slope, does it:
> stretch or compress; slip at the tyres; bind in the axle; seperate at
> the transfer case; or break?
>
> --
> *--------------------------------------------------------*
> | ^Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool^ |
> | Heath Raftery, HRSoftWorks _\|/_ |
> *______________________________________m_('.')_m_________*

The Ancient One wrote:
> "Exit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Douglas A. Shrader wrote:
>>> "Exit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>> Douglas A. Shrader wrote:
>>>>> "Exit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>>>> L0nD0t.$t0we11" <"L0nD0t.$t0we11 wrote:
>>>>>>> Roughly 1/6/04 14:40, DBurch7672's monkeys randomly typed:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Part-time 4WD is pointless - if you're going to have 4WD have
>>>>>>>> it all the time.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That's one opinion. Not one held by anyone with a clue
>>>>>>> about 4x4 drive systems, but an opinion nontheless.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, errr, what exactly is the advantage of part-time 4WD?
>>>>>
>>>>> I can turn much sharper in 2 wheel drive than I can when I engage
>>>>> the four wheel drive, tthe last full time I had (a Jeep pickup)
>>>>> would eat a set of front tires in 10,000 miles, you get better
>>>>> fuel milage in 2 wheel drive, you have less wear and tear on the
>>>>> vehicle in 2 wheel drive and 95% of the time I don't need four
>>>>> wheel drive, but when I need it I NEED it, so what would be the
>>>>> point of full time?
>>>>
>>>> If your 4WD setup reduces your turning ability and eats tyres like
>>>> that it must be a very bad setup.
>>>
>>> You simply cannot turn the front wheels as sharply when you have an
>>> axle trying to turn also as you can with no turning axle. Even the
>>> part time 4x4 will bind when making a sharp turn in 4 wheel drive
>>> mode.
>>>
>> What are you talking about? My axle doesn't turn - I doubt yours does
>> either!
>
> How do you get power to your front wheels if the front axle doesn't
> turn? That is BS, the front wheels are turned by the front axle, that
> has a u-joint that binds if forced to turn at to sharp an angle,
> hence the binding if you attempt a sharp turn. From your statement I
> have to assume you have no clue how four wheel drives work, thus I
> have no more interest in conversing with you on this subject.
>
Yet you're so conceited you had to reply?


--
Julian
---------
= Pretentious Sig required =

Douglas A. Shrader wrote:
> "Exit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Douglas A. Shrader wrote:
>
>>>> If your 4WD setup reduces your turning ability and eats tyres like
>>>> that it must be a very bad setup.
>>>
>>> You simply cannot turn the front wheels as sharply when you have an
>>> axle trying to turn also as you can with no turning axle. Even the
>>> part time 4x4 will bind when making a sharp turn in 4 wheel drive
>>> mode.
>>>
>> What are you talking about? My axle doesn't turn - I doubt yours does
>> either! I expect part-time 4WD to bind when turning, but not a
>> permanent 4WD system with 3 diffs.
>
> I think I see the problem here. I am not talking about a permanent 4
> wheel drive with 3 diffs, I'm talking about full time four wheel
> drive, which only has two diffs. The two diff setup with no option to
> use two wheel drive has always been call Full time four wheel drive,
> long before I ever heard of the diffs being used, and that is the
> diffintion I think of when someone says fulltime.
>
If you have fulltime 4WD with only 2 diffs, how is the difference in
distance travelled by the front and rear axles on solid surfaces?

>>
>>> I'm sure not all full time 4x4's eat tires like that Jeep did, but
>>> they still have accelerated tire wear, now way around it.
>>>
>> Why? 200hp divided by 4 wheels driven is 50hp each, half that of
>> 2WD. As long as you have a well designed 3 diff 4WD system wear will
>> not increase over 2WD.
>
> See above.
>
>>
>>> My tyres (with fulltime 4WD) last 40,000 miles and
>>>> handling is unaffected. As for fuel consumption, the savings are
>>>> very marginal from what I have experienced, perhaps there are some
>>>> figures that would demonstrate the savings? As for wear and tear,
>>>> well it must be a delicate vehicle if driving your 4WD in 4WD wears
>>>> it out prematurely.
>>>
>>> Drive a part time 4x4 and you wouldn't make such statements. Tires,
>>> sure, you get 40,000 in fulltime, you might get 60,000 on the same
>>> tires with part time, and your handling is affected, you are just
>>> compensating for it. Milage varies greatly, large decrease when
>>> driving in four wheel drive mode, even the owners manuals will tell
>>> you that, not to mention the hit you see when you refuel.
>>>
>> I own a part-time 4WD LR Series 2. The tyres don't last any longer
>> than my Discovery. I'm not compensating for the fact that my Disco
>> handles
> better -
>> it handles better *because* it is 4WD. When I drive my SII in 2 or
>> 4WD the mileage varies by 1mpg at most.
>
>
> See above.
>
>>
>>>>
>>>> The point of full-time 4WD is that it is always there when you need
>>>> it. You hit a greasy bit of tarmac, its already there, pulling out
>>>> of a wet junction - already there. Patchy snow covered road with
>>>> some clear tarmac, already there. Towing heavy loads on road etc,
>>>> etc.
>>>
>>> THe point of learning to drive, you don't need it there. Hit a
>>> greasy bit of tarmac, who cares, just go on across, you don't need
>>> four wheel drive for that. Wet junction, same thing, even if it's
>>> solid ice you don't need four wheel drive, you just need driving
>>> ability. None of the items you listed require four wheel drive,
>>> sure in some cases it makes it a bit easier, but not required by
>>> any means
>>>
>> Yeah right. And if I eat enough carrots I don't need headlights
>> either. . . . . . Makes me wonder why all these idiots buy 4WD.
>
> Now your being silly, I expected better from you. The road was snow
> and ice covered this morning here, I had no trouble making it to work
> in 2 wheel drive. 4 wheel drive is used when there are four foot
> drifts across the road, not patches of snow here and there.
>
I didn't say you couldn't drive in bad weather without 4WD, but it does make
it easier, just like night driving with headlights is easier than without.

>>
>>>>
>>>> I wonder if part-time is so good, why all manufacturers have or are
>>>> dumping it?
>>>
>>> Many good ideas are left behind because the general public is to
>>> dumb to survive without help. Sure there are smart individuals but
>>> they don't buy enough to control the market. Please don't take that
>>> as a personal insult, it isn't intended as such. Don't know about
>>> your country but quality is fading fast here because to many people
>>> base purchase decisions on price. Why spend $20.00 on a wrench when
>>> I can buy this one for $2.00? Then when the $2.00 bends they gripe
>>> about it "they don't build things like they used to", then they go
>>> out and buy another $2.00 wrench. Part time is great for people
>>> like me, I really don't care what you want to drive. You asked for
>>> reasons, I gave you reasons. To and for me they are valid, to each
>>> his own.
>>
>> As I said before I own bothe full and part-time 4WD vehicles, so I
>> get a good view of both.
>
> See above, what you and I were calling fulltime are not the same
> vehicles. Tell me, does your part time have two or three diffs?
>
My part-time system has 2 diffs - I can't understand how a permanent 4WD
system with only 2 instead of 3 diffs could allow for rotational differences
between front and rear axles. What vehicles have a permanent 4WD system with
2 diffs?

> It is fair to say that your reasons are vaild to you and
>> I respect that, I do suspect that the real problem is the lack of
>> availability of decent permanent 4WD system in US vehicles. As you
>> say, cars are cheaper in the US and purchased more on price than
>> here in my experience which is why I thin low-tech is more
>> acceptable as long as the price is also low.
>
> You thin? ;-)

Correct me if I'm wrong by all means - which vehciles in the US come with
permanent 4WD?

--
Julian
---------
= Pretentious Sig required =

Douglas A. Shrader wrote:
> "Chris Phillipo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>>>
>>> I think I see the problem here. I am not talking about a permanent
>>> 4 wheel drive with 3 diffs, I'm talking about full time four wheel
>>> drive, which only has two diffs. The two diff setup with no option
>>> to use two wheel drive has always been call Full time four wheel
>>> drive, long before I ever heard of the diffs being used, and that
>>> is the diffintion I think of when someone says fulltime.
>>
>> That's called a farm tractor unless by no middle diff you mean it
>> has a viscous coupling or something similar.
>>
>
> No genius, as a farmer who owns a tractor I'm well aware of what a
> tractor is, though obviously you aren't. Listen carefully.
>
> The fulltime has an Engine, Transmission, and Transfer case. One
> Driveshaft goes from the front of the Transfer case to the Front
> Differential, a second Driveshaft goes from the rear of the Transfer
> case to the Rear Differential. There is no Third Differential, Trucks
> that have a Third Differential are called Fulltime 4x4's by many, but
> as the name was first applied to the vehicles I described it becomes
> confusing, so I for clarity here borrowed Julians term Permanent Four
> wheel drive.
>
Hmmmm. How does it account for the rotational differences between front and
rear axles with only 2 diffs?

> I do hope all the big words aren't confusing you still.
>
> And please don't make some lame comment about "Well that's only in
> America", because my 84 came from Canada built exactly as I described
> above, and it has worked wonderfully for 300,000 miles. My 91 is
> different only in the lack of locking hubs, using instead a locking
> front differential, and it works great after 215,000 miles. My Jeep
> CJ-7 also has lockouts and no third differential, as anyone with any
> knowledge at all about 4x4's and offroading well knows.
>
> I used to think people who called you an idiot were wrong, now I know
> better.

--
Julian
---------
= Pretentious Sig required =

Heath Raftery wrote:
> Douglas A. Shrader <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> "Chris Phillipo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I think I see the problem here. I am not talking about a permanent
>>>> 4 wheel drive with 3 diffs, I'm talking about full time four wheel
>>>> drive, which only has two diffs. The two diff setup with no option
>>>> to use two wheel drive has always been call Full time four wheel
>>>> drive, long before I ever heard of the diffs being used, and that
>>>> is the diffintion I think of when someone
>> says
>>>> fulltime.
>>>
>>> That's called a farm tractor unless by no middle diff you mean it
>>> has a viscous coupling or something similar.
>>>
>
>> No genius, as a farmer who owns a tractor I'm well aware of what a
>> tractor is, though obviously you aren't. Listen carefully.
>
>> The fulltime has an Engine, Transmission, and Transfer case. One
>> Driveshaft goes from the front of the Transfer case to the Front
>> Differential, a second Driveshaft goes from the rear of the Transfer
>> case to the Rear Differential. There is no Third Differential,
>> Trucks that have a Third Differential are called Fulltime 4x4's by
>> many, but as the name was first applied to the vehicles I described
>> it becomes confusing, so I for clarity here borrowed Julians term
>> Permanent Four wheel drive.
>
> I think I share Chris's lack of understanding here then. How do you
> drive one of these "Permanent Four Wheel Drive" vehicles over a change
> of gradient, or around a corner, on a grippy surface, without scrubing
> tyres or breaking axles?
>
> I'll set out some ASCII art so you can draw me a diagram:
>
> Douglas's "Permanent Four Wheel Drive":
>
> motor---gearbox---transfer case---rear diff
> |
> front diff
>
> That is, front and rear diffs driven by transfer case (no third
> differential or viscous coupling).
>
> Now here is the car going from a flat road to up a hill:
>
> __ /
> /--\ /__-O/
> O----O____O___/
>
> Now, when this "Permanent Four Wheel Drive" vehicle starts going up
> the slope, does it:
> stretch or compress; slip at the tyres; bind in the axle; seperate at
> the transfer case; or break?
>
>> ^Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool^ |
>> Heath Raftery, HRSoftWorks _\|/_ |
> *______________________________________m_('.')_m_________*

Thats exactly what I'm still wondering. . . . . .

--
Julian
---------
= Pretentious Sig required =

Douglas A. Shrader wrote:
> "Heath Raftery" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> Douglas A. Shrader <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> "Chris Phillipo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I think I see the problem here. I am not talking about a
>>>>> permanent 4 wheel drive with 3 diffs, I'm talking about full time
>>>>> four wheel drive,
> which
>>> only
>>>>> has two diffs. The two diff setup with no option to use two wheel
> drive
>>> has
>>>>> always been call Full time four wheel drive, long before I ever
>>>>> heard
> of
>>> the
>>>>> diffs being used, and that is the diffintion I think of when
>>>>> someone says fulltime.
>>>>
>>>> That's called a farm tractor unless by no middle diff you mean it
>>>> has a viscous coupling or something similar.
>>>>
>>
>>> No genius, as a farmer who owns a tractor I'm well aware of what a
>>> tractor is, though obviously you aren't. Listen carefully.
>>
>>> The fulltime has an Engine, Transmission, and Transfer case. One
>>> Driveshaft goes from the front of the Transfer case to the Front
>>> Differential, a second Driveshaft goes from the rear of the
>>> Transfer case to the Rear Differential. There is no Third
>>> Differential, Trucks that have a Third Differential are called
>>> Fulltime 4x4's by many, but as the name was first applied to the
>>> vehicles I described it becomes confusing, so I for clarity here
>>> borrowed Julians term Permanent Four wheel drive.
>>
>> I think I share Chris's lack of understanding here then. How do you
>> drive one of these "Permanent Four Wheel Drive" vehicles over a
>> change of gradient, or around a corner, on a grippy surface, without
>> scrubing tyres or breaking axles?
>>
>> I'll set out some ASCII art so you can draw me a diagram:
>>
>> Douglas's "Permanent Four Wheel Drive":
>
> No, that is Fulltime four wheel drive, the type that has been
> manufactured for the last fifty years. Yes, the tires have to slip,
> that is why you get the increased tire wear, binding on sharp turns,
> increased wear on the driveline and lower gas milage, and it is why I
> said part time was better than fulltime. The Permanent Four wheel
> drive has the Third Differential and is NOT the type I was refering
> to when I said part time was better. Jesus people, learn to read,
> Please.
>
At the risk of getting shouted at as you seem to be losing your temper here,
can you let me know some of the vehicles you describe as having permanent
4WD but only 2 diffs - I can't find any road vehicle that fits this design?

--
Julian
---------
= Pretentious Sig required =

"Exit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Douglas A. Shrader wrote:
> > "Heath Raftery" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >> Douglas A. Shrader <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >>> "Chris Phillipo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >>> news:[email protected]...
> >>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I think I see the problem here. I am not talking about a
> >>>>> permanent 4 wheel drive with 3 diffs, I'm talking about full time
> >>>>> four wheel drive,
> > which
> >>> only
> >>>>> has two diffs. The two diff setup with no option to use two wheel
> > drive
> >>> has
> >>>>> always been call Full time four wheel drive, long before I ever
> >>>>> heard
> > of
> >>> the
> >>>>> diffs being used, and that is the diffintion I think of when
> >>>>> someone says fulltime.
> >>>>
> >>>> That's called a farm tractor unless by no middle diff you mean it
> >>>> has a viscous coupling or something similar.
> >>>>
> >>
> >>> No genius, as a farmer who owns a tractor I'm well aware of what a
> >>> tractor is, though obviously you aren't. Listen carefully.
> >>
> >>> The fulltime has an Engine, Transmission, and Transfer case. One
> >>> Driveshaft goes from the front of the Transfer case to the Front
> >>> Differential, a second Driveshaft goes from the rear of the
> >>> Transfer case to the Rear Differential. There is no Third
> >>> Differential, Trucks that have a Third Differential are called
> >>> Fulltime 4x4's by many, but as the name was first applied to the
> >>> vehicles I described it becomes confusing, so I for clarity here
> >>> borrowed Julians term Permanent Four wheel drive.
> >>
> >> I think I share Chris's lack of understanding here then. How do you
> >> drive one of these "Permanent Four Wheel Drive" vehicles over a
> >> change of gradient, or around a corner, on a grippy surface, without
> >> scrubing tyres or breaking axles?
> >>
> >> I'll set out some ASCII art so you can draw me a diagram:
> >>
> >> Douglas's "Permanent Four Wheel Drive":
> >
> > No, that is Fulltime four wheel drive, the type that has been
> > manufactured for the last fifty years. Yes, the tires have to slip,
> > that is why you get the increased tire wear, binding on sharp turns,
> > increased wear on the driveline and lower gas milage, and it is why I
> > said part time was better than fulltime. The Permanent Four wheel
> > drive has the Third Differential and is NOT the type I was refering
> > to when I said part time was better. Jesus people, learn to read,
> > Please.
> >
> At the risk of getting shouted at as you seem to be losing your temper
here,
> can you let me know some of the vehicles you describe as having permanent
> 4WD but only 2 diffs - I can't find any road vehicle that fits this
design?

Not with you, I'm only getting agravated with the idiots.
The 1978 Jeep J-20 pickup with quadratrac was full time four wheel drive
with only two Differentials, and as I stated you could barely make a turn
with it, I had to back up three times just to make it around the Taco Bell
drive through here, and it would eat a set of Radials in 10,000 miles. There
were also a blue million pickups built in that time frame with the same set
up, Chevys were very common around here,which is why they came out with
conversion kits for people to make them into part time 4x4. Unfortunately no
conversion was possible for the quadratrac so I was stuck. Now anytime
someone says fulltime 4 wheel drive those are the vehicles I think of, and
why I say part time is better. The new ones would be better called all wheel
drive, would eliminate alot of confusion from using an existing name for a
different product.
I really have not looked recently to see how they are built now, because I
only want part time, full time is hardly needed or justified for me.

"Exit" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Heath Raftery wrote:
> > Douglas A. Shrader <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> "Chris Phillipo" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> news:[email protected]...
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I think I see the problem here. I am not talking about a permanent
> >>>> 4 wheel drive with 3 diffs, I'm talking about full time four wheel
> >>>> drive, which only has two diffs. The two diff setup with no option
> >>>> to use two wheel drive has always been call Full time four wheel
> >>>> drive, long before I ever heard of the diffs being used, and that
> >>>> is the diffintion I think of when someone
> >> says
> >>>> fulltime.
> >>>
> >>> That's called a farm tractor unless by no middle diff you mean it
> >>> has a viscous coupling or something similar.
> >>>
> >
> >> No genius, as a farmer who owns a tractor I'm well aware of what a
> >> tractor is, though obviously you aren't. Listen carefully.
> >
> >> The fulltime has an Engine, Transmission, and Transfer case. One
> >> Driveshaft goes from the front of the Transfer case to the Front
> >> Differential, a second Driveshaft goes from the rear of the Transfer
> >> case to the Rear Differential. There is no Third Differential,
> >> Trucks that have a Third Differential are called Fulltime 4x4's by
> >> many, but as the name was first applied to the vehicles I described
> >> it becomes confusing, so I for clarity here borrowed Julians term
> >> Permanent Four wheel drive.
> >
> > I think I share Chris's lack of understanding here then. How do you
> > drive one of these "Permanent Four Wheel Drive" vehicles over a change
> > of gradient, or around a corner, on a grippy surface, without scrubing
> > tyres or breaking axles?
> >
> > I'll set out some ASCII art so you can draw me a diagram:
> >
> > Douglas's "Permanent Four Wheel Drive":
> >
> > motor---gearbox---transfer case---rear diff
> > |
> > front diff
> >
> > That is, front and rear diffs driven by transfer case (no third
> > differential or viscous coupling).
> >
> > Now here is the car going from a flat road to up a hill:
> >
> > __ /
> > /--\ /__-O/
> > O----O____O___/
> >
> > Now, when this "Permanent Four Wheel Drive" vehicle starts going up
> > the slope, does it:
> > stretch or compress; slip at the tyres; bind in the axle; seperate at
> > the transfer case; or break?
> >
> >> ^Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool^ |
> >> Heath Raftery, HRSoftWorks _\|/_ |
> > *______________________________________m_('.')_m_________*
>
> Thats exactly what I'm still wondering. . . . . .


Why are you still wondering? I told you three days ago they bind and eat
tires like candy from the scuffing.